ABGC members have been telling ABGC for some time that audit and compliance demands for various productive standards and regulations are getting harder to manage, particularly the cost, paperwork, duplication and sometimes inconsistent expectations between auditors.
ABGC took those concerns directly to Freshcare through its national review of the Food Safety & Quality and Environmental Standards.
Our submission was developed from grower feedback calling for a simpler and more practical approach that maintains Australia’s high food safety and environmental standards without placing unnecessary cost and stress on farming businesses.
With the new Freshcare Food Safety & Quality Standard Edition 5 (FSQ5) and updated Freshcare Rules now released, we’re pleased to see a few of the issues raised by banana growers reflected in the new framework.
What has improved?
Some of the changes most relevant to banana growers include:
- More proportionate audit times. Audit duration must now consider factors such as the scope and complexity of the business, number of sites and previous certification history. In appropriate circumstances, the standard minimum FSQ audit duration can be reduced by up to 30%.
- Better arrangements for multiple farms. Multiple sites operating under common management may be able to be covered under one registration where they can reasonably be assessed together. This is an important step towards reducing repeat auditing.
- More flexible audits. Freshcare’s Rules provide for remote and two-part audits, allowing some documentation to be assessed remotely rather than requiring everything to be dealt with during the farm visit.
- Clearer requirements and guidance. FSQ5 has been restructured with clearer language and stronger links between requirements, forms, factsheets and supporting information.
- Greater focus on auditor consistency. Freshcare has strengthened its oversight of Certification Bodies and auditors, including auditor calibration, witness audits and review of audit reports.
- A stronger avenue for grower feedback. Freshcare can seek confidential feedback from participants about Certification Bodies (CBs) and auditors, with complaints able to cover issues including auditor conduct, CB performance and fees.
These changes are particularly relevant because inconsistency, duplication and audit cost were among the strongest issues raised by banana growers through ABGC’s submission. Growers told us that different interpretations between auditors created uncertainty and unnecessary frustration, while repeat requirements across certification schemes added time and cost.
Your feedback helped shape the conversation
Freshcare received more than 180 submissions through its review and has acknowledged that industry feedback helped shape the structure, language, requirements and streamlining of FSQ5.
ABGC was one of those voices, putting forward a detailed submission based specifically on the experiences of banana growers.
While we can’t attribute individual changes solely to ABGC, there is clear alignment between a number of the issues we raised and the direction Freshcare has taken.
For example, ABGC called for reduced duplication for businesses operating multiple farms, clearer and more practical guidance, greater consistency between auditors, stronger oversight of CBs and a mechanism for growers to provide feedback about their audit experience.
These are all areas where we can now see progress.
This is why grower feedback and strong industry representation matter. When members tell us where systems aren’t working on the ground, ABGC can take those experiences to the organisations making the decisions and advocate for practical change.
There is still work to do
The new Standard doesn’t address everything we asked for.
Audit and travel costs remain a concern, particularly for smaller and remote businesses. There are no specific caps on travel costs, and the industry’s request for greater flexibility around unannounced audits has not substantially changed.
Importantly, some of the biggest opportunities to reduce duplication involve the Freshcare Environmental Standard, which is being reviewed separately.
ABGC’s submission called for duplication between Food Safety, Environmental and other certification requirements to be reduced, including situations where growers are asked to provide the same information or evidence more than once.
We will continue to pursue these issues.
What happens next?
ABGC will take a closer look at how FSQ5 works in practice for banana businesses as growers transition to the new Standard next year.
In particular, we want to ensure the opportunities for shorter, more proportionate audits, multi-site arrangements and remote document assessment translate into real savings in time, administration and cost on farm.
As always, grower experience will be important. If something is working better, or if you’re still seeing unnecessary duplication, inconsistent interpretations or costs, please let us know.
Your feedback gives us the evidence we need to keep advocating for a system that maintains high standards while being practical, proportionate and workable for banana growers.